First consider 3 types of
people: Looters (L), Moochers (M) and Producers (P). Ls are those who use force
to gain the unearned for themselves or others; they are primarily politicians.
Ms expect the unearned but let
government do the looting for them. They are both ‘have-nots’ who simply take
what they can get, and ‘haves’ who vote for the Ls who can best meet their
needs or the needs of others. They are egalitarian: they want everyone to be
equal in terms of economic results.
Ps act to create earned wealth
and only expect the earned; they have the right to keep what they earn. They
engage in free trade and expand the wealth pool to enable the economy to grow
and provide jobs for others. They are thus the primary source of government revenue
used to benefit the Ms. (And the M&Ls don’t think the Ps pay their “fair
share”?) They believe in treating people equally - which does not mean making
them equal. The M&Ls don’t seem to grasp the difference and that the result
of their looting and mooching is fewer Ps and less to loot.
The M&Ls are clearly immoral: their needs are not a moral
claim on others and can only be attained via statist policies that force the Ps
to support them without regard for the rights of others or for the negative
economic impacts. This is essentially the Left (represented by Obama), and they
are leading us to the ‘European state’ where even the threat of real austerity
measures will cause riots in the streets. Is that really what they want?
The Ps have a moral code that keeps them virtuous: rational,
independent, honest, just, productive and proud. They depend on a capitalist
system that supports all individuals’ freedom and rights, and enables each to
achieve his goals to the best of his ability. This is what our Founding Fathers
designed for this freest of all countries and it worked well until we started
becoming a welfare state. The Ps’ are always willing to help the remaining
have-nots via a basic safety net supported by charity and government where necessary.
This is essentially the Right (represented by Romney) and their economic principles
need to be applied as in our past.
Enough of the vitriol, irrational talking points, lies and racist
comments from the Left. Look no further than the VP debate for an example: Biden
showed unacceptable disrespect for, and condescension toward, Ryan; and he
clearly lied about ObamaCare (“death panels” and the mandate for contraceptives
et al), not knowing of the Libyan embassy attack, and his votes on the Afghan
and Iraq wars. Only after the personal attacks against Romney backfired did the
Obama team drop their negative ads.
Unlike Obama supporters, I will admit that Romney is not an ideal
candidate. He is not enough of a true capitalist, is too pragmatic, and is too conservative (albeit not as radical
as some) on social issues. That’s why I am an independent hoping for the Republican
party to change certain views and become more principled.
However, Obama is a radical idealist who is farthest from the ‘ideal’.
What explains his Marxist philosophy with his class warfare, racism, egalitarianism
and envy of the most successful, and what makes him most dangerous and evil, is
his nihilism. He is, in essence, a destroyer of the good for being the good; and
the good here is our country as defined by our founding documents. For the sake
of the weak, he is willing to destroy the strong.
He is destroying our economy with unsustainable debt and
entitlements (driven by unearned need), business controls and regulations
(driven by distaste for private markets), rule by executive order (unconstitutional
and totalitarian), higher taxes, and the belief that government must stimulate
the economy. The harmful results are obvious. Romney wants to free the private
markets to stimulate the economy which will increase production, create jobs
and reduce dependency on entitlements.
Obama’s energy policy sacrifices
oil, gas and coal industries to inefficient and impractical ‘green’ companies; it
sacrifices a lucrative and job-enhancing Canadian pipeline to the Chinese; it
controls energy use and raises energy prices. All this in the name of
environmentalism (resting on the “global warming” myth) and egalitarianism. Romney wants to maximize energy
production to enable us to become more energy independent, lower costs and reduce
unemployment.
ObamaCare is a significant
contributor to our weak economy and is certain to destroy our health care
system. It raises HC costs while lowering quality, prevents insurance companies
from meeting real needs and lowering costs, controls and rations care, etc. As
individuals and businesses are forced to drop existing policies, we will
approach Obama’s shameful goal of a government-run, single-payer system. Romney
wants to replace all that with sound reforms that will maintain high quality of
care and lower costs.
Obama has no real foreign policy.
He appeases, empowers and subsidizes Muslims; he does not recognize our enemy, totalitarian
Islam, even showing preference to Arab nations over Israel. He believes we are not exceptional; that we
must be a less aggressive defender of “peace through strength.” We are a
dangerously weaker nation as a result; e.g. the “Arab Spring” has created
greater enemies with terrorist organizations taking control in the M.E. Romney believes that M.E. governments and their
support of terrorism are not mere “bumps in the road” (see http://herit.ag/W4vbKd. See also http://bit.ly/Sec8tT for an objective
evaluation of the recent M.E. attacks.) Obama
is more dangerous to our country than is our enemy. Romney wants to utilize our strengths and uphold our
individual rights in implementing a foreign policy focused on our protection
from that enemy.
